Australia considers fast-track visas for white South African farmers

[Gadion]

Simply put, the majority of violence in South Africa can be attributed to economics and not race, and and research has shown that racial violence in South Africa is more often than not perpetuated by White South Africans against Black South Africans, not the other way around.

Unfortunately I'm unable to post links to research to back up my points as I haven't posted enough on the forums yet, however, google farm murders and Africa Check for information, or the South African Coffin Assault Case for an example of typical racial violence in SA, and SA crime statistics. The South African HRC is also a useful source of information on this.

As another South African, I'd agree that most crimes are economically based rather than inspired by racial hatred, so with most of your post I actually have very few questions or reservations.

However, as you say you work in this field and I'm having trouble getting information, could you please elucidate on the following matters?:

1. You claim that research has shown that racial violence in South Africa is more often than not perpetuated by white South Africans against black South Africans, rather than the other way around. Is this in terms of raw numbers or proportional to population size? It would seem counter-intuitive that this would be the case given the demographics of the country.

2. What do you make of claims that the reporting of racial incidents in South Africa is selectively implemented and offers a skewed picture? Solidarity's report on this matter appears factual, but are they leaving things out themselves? A particular concern of mine is incitement to violence which seems to be ignored.

3. This appears to be a propaganda piece by an author I suspect to be biased. However in this piece she makes an observation I would like to test the truth of. She claims that the numbers of murders in South Africa reported by the South African Police Services are basically fudged and a complete under-representation of the issue. According to the author, Interpol used to track murder rates in South Africa and got to twice the number the SAPS does. Is she simply lying or is there some difference in the method that they used to gather information?
I did my own post on murder in South Africa a few pages back, but this article flies against most of the information I could gather, and appears to be claiming the number of white South Africans murdered are along the figures claimed by Afriforum.

[Garkosh]

Sure!

1) Proportional to population size. However, I actually problematically represented this in my original post. We don't have conclusive stats on White vs Black hate crimes, we just have stats on who the victims are of hate crimes, which are overwhelmingly black in South Africa. While one can do meta analysis of data and draw conclusions about white on black crime (you essentially have to work out which crimes were xenophobic, sexist and racist) and thus draw the conclusion I suggested, but my post I think wrongly implied the source of my claim. That being said, we also do need to bear in mind rates of reporting, which I elaborate on later. Hate Crimes Working Group has some credible research on this.

Willingness to a report a crime after it has been committed has a strong correlation between socio-economic status and willingness to report, if you have a higher socio-economic status you are more willing to report crime. Furthermore, as for public perception, media tends to go for sensational stories, this results in extra attention given to relationly speaking excessive crimes, or crimes that are rarer or against individuals higher socio-economically speaking. As a result, a significantly higher proportion of murders of higher and middle class individuals (which tend to be skewed significantly towards the white population) are reported in the press vs violence in poorer groups. I don't have citations for this in front of me, but right now, but there is a lot of research on this topic, and is not difficult to confirm.

2) Well, Mulder has a number of inaccuracies in his statement. Firstly, he is saying the SAHRC investigates things under it's own initiative. That is not true, the SAHRC can only investigate something if a complaint is filed.

Secondly, SAHRC has investigated, and pushed forward prosecution on some of the individuals Mulder suggests they haven't. You can find evidence of this on SAHRC's website.

Finally, Mulder is referring to Mahumapelo's comments are racist. Some of Mahumapelo's comments I think are worded problematically (probably has something do with not being first language English), however, Mahumapelo was actually talking about White Supremacy, and the racist impacts of it. Essentially, Mulder was calling Mahumapelo racist for calling out racism. (That being said, This is based on reading what was reported in the media, I haven't seen a full transcript of Mahumapelo's statements)

As for incitement to violence, it's difficult. At the end of the day, if you are stating facts publicly that will rile up a crowd, that isn't incitement. If you are spreading fake information and calling for violence, it is incitement. Politicians in particular are very good at walking this fine line, and when they cross it they are quick to withdraw. A good example was a black politician calling criminals "cockroaches", the following day she withdrew the comment as that essentially falls under hate speech. This is personal analysis from myself

3) That article is completely inaccurate.

First off, it doesn't do a good job of citation, it only cites a minority of the facts presented, and those cited is done vaguely by referencing entire books / reports. Furthermore, the research cited is from Afriforum and her own book. Afriforum has consistently been found to have very problematic methodology in their research, i'll elaborate on that a bit further on.

As for some of the points she raised: Firstly, the interpol statistics she refers to includes the number of Attempted murder and successful murder, thus it is not actually contradictory with Saps statistics.

She also speaks about the rates of crime reporting have dropped. Yes, that is believed for the most part, however, murder is an exception to this rule generally speaking. Furthermore, research shows that economic status has an impact on whether or not you choose to report a crime, and white South Africans generally have a higher economic status and as such one can conclude are more likely to report crime. There is also no research that suggests White South Africans balk this trend.

As for Saps reporting in general, while they have at times messed with reporting periods, (for example, they have changed from which month to which month they tracked data), this has only had an impact on a single report, and does not impact the macro data. Furthemore, There isn't evidence to suggest that SAPS are lying about what has been reported to them.

In general, this article is pure misinformation, attempting to push an agenda.

4) As for why Afriforum is so off the mark in their research, i'll give a quick break down of their main methodological error associated with their research.

When calculating their per 100 000 murder rate, they compare the amount of farm murders versus the number of commercial farmers. This is deeply misleading, as the definition of a farm murder is significantly wider than the sample they compared against. In terms of rough numbers, we have about 30 000 commercial farmers, I think the number they used is 32 000, thought I can't remember offhand exactly. However, this excludes the 40 000 non commercial farmers in South Africa. This also excludes the family members of commercial and non-commercial farmers, which is around 150-200 000, and lastly, it doesn't include workers on farms which make up about 900 000 individuals. Inherently the problem with their research is that they draw murders from this pool of well over a million, but then compare it to a a very cherry picked pool of potential victims.

There are other errors with their research, but this alone essentially completely nullifies it. Africa Check, Stats SA and other credible organisations have not only pointed this out, they have informed Afriforum about this. Afriforum has refused to change their methodology to be more accurate.

Apologies for not including links, MMO-Champion says I haven't posted enough to.

[Gadion]

Sure!

1) Proportional to population size. However, I actually problematically represented this in my original post. We don't have conclusive stats on White vs Black hate crimes, we just have stats on who the victims are of hate crimes, which are overwhelmingly black in South Africa. While one can do meta analysis of data and draw conclusions about white on black crime (you essentially have to work out which crimes were xenophobic, sexist and racist) and thus draw the conclusion I suggested, but my post I think wrongly implied the source of my claim. That being said, we also do need to bear in mind rates of reporting, which I elaborate on later. Hate Crimes Working Group has some credible research on this.

Willingness to a report a crime after it has been committed has a strong correlation between socio-economic status and willingness to report, if you have a higher socio-economic status you are more willing to report crime. Furthermore, as for public perception, media tends to go for sensational stories, this results in extra attention given to relationly speaking excessive crimes, or crimes that are rarer or against individuals higher socio-economically speaking. As a result, a significantly higher proportion of murders of higher and middle class individuals (which tend to be skewed significantly towards the white population) are reported in the press vs violence in poorer groups. I don't have citations for this in front of me, but right now, but there is a lot of research on this topic, and is not difficult to confirm.

2) Well, Mulder has a number of inaccuracies in his statement. Firstly, he is saying the SAHRC investigates things under it's own initiative. That is not true, the SAHRC can only investigate something if a complaint is filed.

Secondly, SAHRC has investigated, and pushed forward prosecution on some of the individuals Mulder suggests they haven't. You can find evidence of this on SAHRC's website.

Finally, Mulder is referring to Mahumapelo's comments are racist. Some of Mahumapelo's comments I think are worded problematically (probably has something do with not being first language English), however, Mahumapelo was actually talking about White Supremacy, and the racist impacts of it. Essentially, Mulder was calling Mahumapelo racist for calling out racism. (That being said, This is based on reading what was reported in the media, I haven't seen a full transcript of Mahumapelo's statements)

As for incitement to violence, it's difficult. At the end of the day, if you are stating facts publicly that will rile up a crowd, that isn't incitement. If you are spreading fake information and calling for violence, it is incitement. Politicians in particular are very good at walking this fine line, and when they cross it they are quick to withdraw. A good example was a black politician calling criminals "cockroaches", the following day she withdrew the comment as that essentially falls under hate speech. This is personal analysis from myself

3) That article is completely inaccurate.

First off, it doesn't do a good job of citation, it only cites a minority of the facts presented, and those cited is done vaguely by referencing entire books / reports. Furthermore, the research cited is from Afriforum and her own book. Afriforum has consistently been found to have very problematic methodology in their research, i'll elaborate on that a bit further on.

As for some of the points she raised: Firstly, the interpol statistics she refers to includes the number of Attempted murder and successful murder, thus it is not actually contradictory with Saps statistics.

She also speaks about the rates of crime reporting have dropped. Yes, that is believed for the most part, however, murder is an exception to this rule generally speaking. Furthermore, research shows that economic status has an impact on whether or not you choose to report a crime, and white South Africans generally have a higher economic status and as such one can conclude are more likely to report crime. There is also no research that suggests White South Africans balk this trend.

As for Saps reporting in general, while they have at times messed with reporting periods, (for example, they have changed from which month to which month they tracked data), this has only had an impact on a single report, and does not impact the macro data. Furthemore, There isn't evidence to suggest that SAPS are lying about what has been reported to them.

In general, this article is pure misinformation, attempting to push an agenda.

4) As for why Afriforum is so off the mark in their research, i'll give a quick break down of their main methodological error associated with their research.

When calculating their per 100 000 murder rate, they compare the amount of farm murders versus the number of commercial farmers. This is deeply misleading, as the definition of a farm murder is significantly wider than the sample they compared against. In terms of rough numbers, we have about 30 000 commercial farmers, I think the number they used is 32 000, thought I can't remember offhand exactly. However, this excludes the 40 000 non commercial farmers in South Africa. This also excludes the family members of commercial and non-commercial farmers, which is around 150-200 000, and lastly, it doesn't include workers on farms which make up about 900 000 individuals. Inherently the problem with their research is that they draw murders from this pool of well over a million, but then compare it to a a very cherry picked pool of potential victims.

There are other errors with their research, but this alone essentially completely nullifies it. Africa Check, Stats SA and other credible organisations have not only pointed this out, they have informed Afriforum about this. Afriforum has refused to change their methodology to be more accurate.

Apologies for not including links, MMO-Champion says I haven't posted enough to.

Thank you a lot for your response, it reads as a well-informed and relevant discussion of the concerns I had raised!

I do have a follow-up on 2) again though.
Since politicians often carefully word their statements, they might be implying things they could not openly state and in this manner evade criticism and legal action by barely staying within the lines.

As an example, take Julius Malema, who has been to court because of his statements and behaviour before but insists on repeating his actions every now and again.
He's publicly sang the "Shoot the Boer" song, even after the courts have warned him to stop doing so
I believe he once called Helen Zille a cockroach? (dehumanising someone is a major step to classifying them as a viable target)
Variations of basically "white man, we're coming for you"
"We're going to slit the throat..." regarding Athol Trollip. (I recognise that this does not necessarily mean that he's threatening to kill him, but this is a rather brutal warning, and openly admitted to him that Trollip's race is the major decision factor in this regard)
"Not calling for a genocide, for now..."

With all of this, how is he not in jail, and is this not directly or indirectly incitement?
There was even a suggestion on one episode of Carte Blanche in April 2017 alleging that Malema was paying intruders to attack people on farms.
Add to this some other hatemongers stirring the pot, and our country is in an uncomfortable situation.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Why not go to Norway?

[Najnaj]

Slander and lies? Coming from the person that labeled me a green?

Hypocrisy, you really do just own it don't you?

Don't bother arguing with Torto. How many people on this site do you think reads anything he has to say without rolling their eyes.

[Comrade Libtard]

As a South African who works in this field, I'd like to inform you this is not the case. Please read up fact checking websites about this. There is a propaganda organisation in South Africa called Afriforum which is attempting to disseminate misinformation about this. Feel free to read up articles from fact checking organisations such as AfricaCheck for clarity on this:

The last time farm murders were racially broken down through official research (its way out of date so not particularly valid) actually showed disproportionate murder of Black Farmers in relation to the number of Black Farmers that exist. This was likely due to the fact that White Farmers are often more well off and could afford superior security.

Furthermore, Afriforum conducts flawed and intentionally misleading research. In their research they suggest that White Farmers are murdered at 4 times the standard murder rate in South Africa. However, when conducting their research they chose to ignore about 90% of the population living in the area, and cherry pick their respondents. Other credible research has suggested that Farmers in SA are murdered at a 6th of the rate of the rest of the population.

And finally, while the evidence is sketchy, evidence available has suggested that White South Africans are murdered at a significantly lower rate compared to all other population groups in relation to their population size, while SA does not track murder by race, we do track by location and district. Thus, we can see that the majority of murder in South Africa takes place in poorer areas dominated by non-white groups. In reality Black and Coloured South Africans are disproportionately likely to meet a violent end to their life in South Africa when compared to White South Africans.

Simply put, the majority of violence in South Africa can be attributed to economics and not race, and and research has shown that racial violence in South Africa is more often than not perpetuated by White South Africans against Black South Africans, not the other way around.

Unfortunately I'm unable to post links to research to back up my points as I haven't posted enough on the forums yet, however, google farm murders and Africa Check for information, or the South African Coffin Assault Case for an example of typical racial violence in SA, and SA crime statistics. The South African HRC is also a useful source of information on this.

How convenient